The Los Angeles Lakers beat the Nuggets 92-89 behind Andrew Bynum's 29 points and 13 rebounds. That's a great opening line for any reporting of Lakers' ballgames. But, I'm a little concerned with how the Lakers won.
I don't like the idea of Bynum leading the way, because it made the game too close for my comforts. Sure Bynum got the stats along with the minutes, but coach Brown, in keeping Bynum on the floor that long; I noticed that the bench was thrown off.
Looking at the Lakers' bench stats for their first 4 games, it looks like this:
Against Chicago: L.A. bench 29 points 15 rebounds. (Should have been a win)
Against Sacramento: L.A. bench 33 points 18 rebounds. (Loss)
Against Utah: L.A. bench 27 points 18 rebounds. (Win)
Against New York: L.A. bench 40 points 15 rebounds. (Win)
Now, against Denver: L.A. bench 16 points 12 rebounds. (Win)
Yes, Andrew Bynum came up big for the Lakers stat wise, but as you can see, it is at the expense of bench production. How long can this formula work for the Lakers? I'm telling you, without good bench production, this team won't go far in the playoffs. And if coach Brown wants to make a star out of Bynum at the expense of the bench, I have to ask: what are you doing?
Coach Brown gets himself a 3 point win in the last minutes of the game by making Bynum the star of the game? I don't like it. Why you ask?
Because Andrew Bynum has never led the Lakers to anything. Kobe Bryant is the leader of this team and for the Lakers to win, the team has to go through Bryant and not Bynum. If the team starts to rely on Bynum for numbers like he got in today's game, then the Lakers are in trouble.
Bynum is not ready to lead. He's ready to be a strong contributor and that's what the Lakers need right now. The Lakers don't need another leader.
Perhaps I'm wrong, but the Lakers play the Nuggets, again, tomorrow. Let's see what happens tomorrow and talk about it then.
Remember, we're looking for basketball patterns.
mike t.
You can't be serious! Nearly every 3 pointer we took was "wide" open and we still went 2-24! How does Bynum paying regular starters minutes make our bench worse? Your argument makes absolutely no sense. "Coach Brown gets himself a 3pt win in the last minutes of the game by making Bynum the star of the game? I don't like it." Unbelievable! Did you even watch the game? Bynum won the game despite Kobe, who almost gave the game away like he did against the Bulls. Get a clue!!
ReplyDeleteAnonymous,
ReplyDeleteClam down. No need to get all emotional.
mike t.
(new anonymous)
ReplyDeleteMT, I understand what you're saying, but I also think it's too early to draw conclusions.
1) As someone else pointed out, three-point shooting was indeed terrible, and this will improve. If they made only 30% of those threes, and that should be a realistic target, they would have won by 18.
2) Also, they continue to turn the ball over. Another 19 today, although this time they looked a little different. Fewer strips and more just trying to force the ball down low.
The biggest benefit I see with Bynum in this increased role is the intimidation in the paint. Something the Lakers lack normally. Think back to the Shaq days.
I don't know why, but I'm just not missing Lamar..
New Anonymous,
ReplyDeleteYeah, I know it's early and the Lakers play the Nuggets tomorrow. I want to see how the use of Bynum for big minutes impacts the bench.
But, it doesn't matter how many 3 pointers the Lakers took. The point is that the Lakers only used Troy Murphy for a little over 5 minutes the whole game.
The guy averaged 8.5 boards per game while Bynum was gone. And now, Bynum is back and Murphy only gets 5 plus minutes?
I personally don't think McRoberts is as good as Murphy. Plus with coach Brown rotating Gasol and Bynum with McRoberts, meaning either Gasol or Bynum was always in the game, that took away from Metta Peace's influence in the game.
Why go to Metta when Gasol or Bynum were always an option.
This heavy reliance on Bynum has a bad affect on Peace and Murphy. Take away those two from being productive bench players and you have a team relying on 3 players due to the amount of minutes each will be getting.
It doesn't make any sense to me.
mike t.